Does the quality of endoscopic equipment influence the recurrence rate after photodynamic diagnosis-assisted transurethral resection of bladder tumor?

Abstract

BackgroundPhotodynamic diagnosis-assisted transurethral resection of bladder tumor (PDD-TURBT) for nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer is superior to conventional white-light TURBT for cancer detection. However, when performing PDD-TURBT, cystoscopy findings vary depending on the quality of the endoscopic equipment. In this study, we compared the effects of different types of endoscopic equipment on postoperative outcomes. MethodsPatients who underwent their first PDD-TURBT at our clinic were selected. Patients on whom PDD-TURBT was performed using endoscopic equipment A were sorted into Group A, and patients on whom PDD-TURBT was performed using equipment S were sorted into Group S. The characteristics, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and recurrence frequency of these patients were retrospectively investigated and compared. The prognostic factors for RFS were also analyzed. ResultsA total of 49 patients were included in Group A and 46 in Group S. In Group S, a higher detection rate (8.2% vs. 30.4 %, p < 0.01) of carcinoma in situ (CIS) was noted. RFS tended to be better in Group S (HR 0.63, p = 0.15). The frequency of recurrence also tended to be lower in Group S (4.92 vs. 3.66 per 10,000 person-days, p = 0.08). Furthermore, CIS (HR 0.30, p = 0.04) and Bacillus Calmette–Guerin therapy (HR: 0.26, p = 0.01) were significant favorable prognostic factors for RFS. ConclusionThe quality of the endoscopic equipment may influence postoperative recurrence after PDD-TURBT. Higher-quality endoscopic instruments have superior CIS detection capabilities, which can lead to improvements in postoperative outcomes with the appropriate selection of postoperative adjuvant therapy.